Уилбур Шрамм и история «Четырех Отцов-Основателей» научного поля исследований коммуникаций в Соединенных Штатах Америки
Ключевые слова:
исследования коммуникаций, история коммуникаций, теория коммуникации, практика коммуникации, США
Аннотация
В послевоенной "юности" нового научного поля - науки о коммуникациях - оно как никогда нуждалось в своей собственной истории. Исследования коммуникации в Соединенных Штатах Америки, выросшее из школ журналистики и департаментов ораторского искусства американских университетов, со второй Мировой войны и после нее страдало от своего не до конца узаконенного статуса. Данная статья прослеживает путь успешных и упорных попыток американского идеолога науки о коммуникациях Уилбура Шрамма, рассматривая, как он выстроил миф о происхождении науки, основывая ее на достижениях "четырех отцов" исследований коммуникации. Собрав воедино разрозненные истории и концепции, Шрам создал единый, самодостаточный нарратив, определяющий новое научное поле и позволивший коммуникации закрепить за собой статус самостоятельной науки.
Скачивания
Данные скачивания пока не доступны.
Литература
Berelson, B. (1959). The state of communication research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 23(1), 1–6.
Buxton, W. J. (1994). The political economy of communications research. In R. E. Babe (Ed.), Information and communication in economics (pp. 147–175). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Camic, C. (1992). Reputation and predecessor selection: Parsons and the institutionalists. American Sociological Review, 57(4), 421–445.
Carey, J. W. (1996). The Chicago School and mass communication research. In E. E. Dennis & E. Wartella (Eds.), American communication research: The remembered history (pp. 21–38). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Chaffee, S. H., & Rogers, E. M. (1997a). Institutionalization of advanced communication study in American universities. In W. Schramm, The beginnings of communication study in America: A personal memoir (pp. 155–180). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Chaffee, S. H., & Rogers, E. M. (1997b). Editors’ foreword. In W. Schramm, The beginnings of communication study in America: A personal memoir (pp. ix–xii). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Converse, J. (2009). Survey research in the United States: Roots and emergence 1890–1960. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Crowther-Heyck, H. (2006). Patrons of the revolution: Ideals and institutions in postwar behavioral science. Isis, 97, 420–446.
Gary, B. (1996). Communication research, the Rockefeller Foundation, and mobilization for the war on words. Journal of Communication, 46(3), 124–147.
Gitlin, T. (1978). Media sociology: The dominant paradigm. Theory and Society, 6(2), 205–253.
Jones, Robert Alun. “On Merton’s ‘‘History’ and ‘Systematics’ of Sociological Theory’.” In L. Graham, W. Lepenies, & P. Weingart (Eds.), Functions and uses of disciplinary histories (pp. 121–142). Boston: D. Reidel, 1983.
Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1955). Personal influence: The part played by people in the flow of mass communications. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
Pooley, J. (2006). Fifteen pages that shook the field: Personal Influence, Edward Shils, and the remembered history of mass communication research. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 608(1), 130–156.
Rogers, E. M., & Chaffee, S. H. (1994). Communication and journalism from Daddy Bleyer to Wilbur Schramm: A palimpsest. Journalism Monographs, 148.
Schramm, W. (1959). The state of communication research: Comment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 23, 6–9.
Schramm, W. (1960). Mass Communications (2nd ed.). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Schramm, W. (1963). Communication research in the United States. In W. Schramm (Ed.), The science of human communication (pp. 1–16). New York: Basic Books.
Schramm, W. (1997). The beginnings of communication study in America: A personal memoir. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Schramm, W. (1980). The beginnings of communication research in the United States. In D. Nimmo (Ed.), Communication yearbook (4) (pp. 73–82). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Schramm, W. (1983). The unique perspective of communication: A retrospective view. Journal of Communication, 33(3), 6–17.
Simpson, C. (1994). Science of coercion: Communication research and psychological warfare, 1945–1960. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sproule, J. M. (1987). Propaganda studies in American social science: The rise and fall of the critical paradigm. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 73, 60–78.
Stocking, G. W. (1965). On the limits of “presentism” and “historicism” in the historiography of the behavioral sciences. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 1(3), 211–218.
Whitley, R. (174). Cognitive and social institutionalization of scientific specialties and research areas. In R. Whitley (Ed.), Social processes of scientific development (pp. 69–95). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Buxton, W. J. (1994). The political economy of communications research. In R. E. Babe (Ed.), Information and communication in economics (pp. 147–175). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Camic, C. (1992). Reputation and predecessor selection: Parsons and the institutionalists. American Sociological Review, 57(4), 421–445.
Carey, J. W. (1996). The Chicago School and mass communication research. In E. E. Dennis & E. Wartella (Eds.), American communication research: The remembered history (pp. 21–38). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Chaffee, S. H., & Rogers, E. M. (1997a). Institutionalization of advanced communication study in American universities. In W. Schramm, The beginnings of communication study in America: A personal memoir (pp. 155–180). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Chaffee, S. H., & Rogers, E. M. (1997b). Editors’ foreword. In W. Schramm, The beginnings of communication study in America: A personal memoir (pp. ix–xii). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Converse, J. (2009). Survey research in the United States: Roots and emergence 1890–1960. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Crowther-Heyck, H. (2006). Patrons of the revolution: Ideals and institutions in postwar behavioral science. Isis, 97, 420–446.
Gary, B. (1996). Communication research, the Rockefeller Foundation, and mobilization for the war on words. Journal of Communication, 46(3), 124–147.
Gitlin, T. (1978). Media sociology: The dominant paradigm. Theory and Society, 6(2), 205–253.
Jones, Robert Alun. “On Merton’s ‘‘History’ and ‘Systematics’ of Sociological Theory’.” In L. Graham, W. Lepenies, & P. Weingart (Eds.), Functions and uses of disciplinary histories (pp. 121–142). Boston: D. Reidel, 1983.
Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1955). Personal influence: The part played by people in the flow of mass communications. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
Pooley, J. (2006). Fifteen pages that shook the field: Personal Influence, Edward Shils, and the remembered history of mass communication research. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 608(1), 130–156.
Rogers, E. M., & Chaffee, S. H. (1994). Communication and journalism from Daddy Bleyer to Wilbur Schramm: A palimpsest. Journalism Monographs, 148.
Schramm, W. (1959). The state of communication research: Comment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 23, 6–9.
Schramm, W. (1960). Mass Communications (2nd ed.). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Schramm, W. (1963). Communication research in the United States. In W. Schramm (Ed.), The science of human communication (pp. 1–16). New York: Basic Books.
Schramm, W. (1997). The beginnings of communication study in America: A personal memoir. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Schramm, W. (1980). The beginnings of communication research in the United States. In D. Nimmo (Ed.), Communication yearbook (4) (pp. 73–82). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Schramm, W. (1983). The unique perspective of communication: A retrospective view. Journal of Communication, 33(3), 6–17.
Simpson, C. (1994). Science of coercion: Communication research and psychological warfare, 1945–1960. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sproule, J. M. (1987). Propaganda studies in American social science: The rise and fall of the critical paradigm. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 73, 60–78.
Stocking, G. W. (1965). On the limits of “presentism” and “historicism” in the historiography of the behavioral sciences. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 1(3), 211–218.
Whitley, R. (174). Cognitive and social institutionalization of scientific specialties and research areas. In R. Whitley (Ed.), Social processes of scientific development (pp. 69–95). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Опубликован
2018-02-19
Как цитировать
PooleyJ. D. (2018). Уилбур Шрамм и история «Четырех Отцов-Основателей» научного поля исследований коммуникаций в Соединенных Штатах Америки. Коммуникации. Медиа. Дизайн, 2(4), 5-18. извлечено от https://cmd-journal.hse.ru/article/view/7495
Выпуск
Раздел
Научные статьи
